When the United Nations cease-fire brought about an end to the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon earlier this month, the United Nations was initially optimistic that a peacekeeping force could be quickly assembled and sent to southern Lebanon to assist the Lebanese army in keeping the Israelis and Hezbollah from each others throats. As it turned out, it has taken longer than expected

But on Friday, European Union members finally pledged to allocate meaningful numbers of troops to the international force. Following widespread criticism following its initial pledge of just 200 troops, France has now come through with 2,000. Italy has pledged 2,000 to 3,000 troops and Spain plans to send 700. Germany will send a naval force to help patrol the coast of Lebanon.

Still, the wavering and prevarication by EU member states over how many troops to commit have many wondering about the 25-nation club's decisiveness when it comes to foreign policy. The EU has long indicated it wants to play a larger role in world events. But this episode shows Europe still lacks the cohesion and decisiveness in foreign policy, German commentators say on Monday.

Business daily Financial Times Deutschland says: "The fact that Europe has managed to contribute over half the troops for the UN peacekeeping force in the Middle East is an achievement. It shows Europe has made progress since the early 1990s when it wasn't able to keep peace in the Balkans. It shows that the EU is in a better position than it was then to play a role in the world. "But that's not enough. Europe's foreign policy revealed itself as being cumbersome until last Friday. Member states engaged in a sad to-ing and fro-ing before finally agreeing to contribute 7,000 troops." The paper especially singled out France for its waffling on the number of troops it was going to send. Indeed, it seemed that France only upped its bid when Italy took the lead with an offer of 3,000 troops. The dithering, the paper writes, only served to help Hezbollah. And even still, the mandate isn't totally clear -- though it is to be "robust." "It hasn't been clarified whether that goes beyond pure self-defense, and whether the force can help the Lebanese army disarm Hezbollah..." It's also unclear whether the force will secure the border between Syria and Lebanon. Israel says it must, to stop weapons supplies. Syria is resisting that." In short, the paper writes: "The EU has taken on a big responsibility with its participation. Now it must show that it can live up to it."

Left-leaning Berliner Zeitung says Germany is making itself part of the problem in the Middle East conflict by first rejecting any deployment that could bring its troops into confrontation with Israeli soldiers and then stressing that its navy will use force to stop arms shipments to Hezbollah. "Anyone who wants to avoid combat missions against one party -- Israel -- at all cost, but favors the use of force against the other side, becomes part of the conflict," the paper comments on Monday. The editorial notes that German Defense Minister Franz-Josef Jung had first offered to send troops when no one had yet asked for them, then backtracked. The German government then agreed to join the peacekeeping force but ruled out sending combat troops. Now Jung has said Germany's deployment of ships to patrol the coast of Lebanon will indeed be a combat mission to halt arms shipments to Hezbollah. That stance robs Germany of the mediation role it has been seeking in the Middle East, the newspaper writes.

-- David Crossland, 2:30 p.m. CET

Germany's got terrorism on the mind these days. Last month's failed plot to blow up two trains -- leading to a massive manhunt and arrests last week -- has led government officials to consider what might be done to increase rail security. The worst suggestion so far has to belong to Germany's transport minister Wolfgang Tiefensee. Over the weekend, he proposed using some of the country's unemployed as train security guards.

Not surprisingly, his suggestion was blasted by politicians of all stripes. The idea of sending unqualified people to help combat terrorism is "absurd," said Petra Pau of the Left Party. The suggestion, many have said, shows just how little Tiefensee understands about the terrorist threat. And Tiefensee has been listening. He has since qualified his statement saying unemployed people would only be used to deter vandalism and help old people on and off buses rather than to tackle al-Qaida.

But mass circulation newspaper Bild says on Monday that Tiefensee's idea is as doomed as a recent scheme to send jobless benefit receivers to help farmers harvest their crops. The few people who were actually allocated to farms either didn't show up or were unable to cope with the hard manual labor, writes Bild. "Now there's yet another proposal which has been uttered on a whim and which won't lead to anything," the paper says. "Dear politicians. You have the power to do something. So don't just talk, but find meaningful tasks for benefit recipients that they can actually fulfil."

-- David Crossland, 1:45 p.m. CET

As if the problems in Lebanon weren't enough, the confrontation between Iran and the West regarding the former's alleged quest to develop nuclear weapons promises to heat up this week. On Thursday, Iran faces a United Nations deadline to halt uranium enrichment. But the country appears unimpressed. In the last few days Iran has launched a new phase in the Arak heavy-water reactor project, test-fired a long-range missile and announced plans to build light-water reactors on its own in the future.

It's as if Iran is going out of its way to provoke the international community, writes conservative Die Welt. "A few days before the UN ultimatum expiring on Thursday Iran is quite openly presenting its nuclear and military potency while at the same time emphasizing its defensive focus and its basic readiness to negotiate. That is cunning and it is once again dividing the fragile alliance in the UN Security Council. "Washington will have a difficult time taking unilateral action if the Council shies away from imposing sanctions. The only thing that remains to be negotiated -- that has become clear after the verbal muscle-flexing and theatrical self-portrayal -- is whether and how the international community will accompany Iran's genesis as a nuclear power while exerting some control. The alternative is war."